Canon F1, 135mm scanned with HP photosmart.

-- Micheal F. Kelly (Kellys@alaska.net), January 30, 1999

Answers

Cute

I like the way it appears to be peeking out from it's hiding place at the big scary outside world.

Of course a little fill-light in it's eyes would have made it technically perfect, but such studio-perfect lighting is a bit hard to archive out in the wilderness all the time.

-- Kristian Elof Sxrensen (elof@image.dk), January 31, 1999.

An interesting subject in a nice "pose". However the scan seems a bit flat. I'm no photoshop expert, but you might try sliding in the left (black) control in "levels" and bumping up the color saturation. Peter May seems to get good results with his photosmart scanner, maybe he has some advice

-- Larry Korhnak (lvk@gnv.ifas.ufl.edu), January 31, 1999.

Thanks, Larry. My advice is, get a decent scanner if you can afford it. Photosmart seems to routinely lose a lot of the contrast on most scans, and often lightens them up as well. I nearly always increase contrast (in Paintshop Pro) by 15-20%, often reduce brightness by 3 to 9, and sometimes increase color saturation by about %20. This brings some scans reasonably close to the slides; for others in which there are weird lighting conditions, subtle colors, and a bunch of other conditions I haven't exactly figured out, I just can't get a decent scan and I give up. I think the lighting and color rendition in this scan are muted and soft, but nice. The expressiveness of the fox's face is a big plus for this shot. The real question is, how close does it approach the original?

-- Peter May (peter.may@stetson.edu), February 01, 1999.

Actually Peter, I think it is a pretty accurate scan. It was an overcast day and reflects that lighting condition.

-- Micheal F. Kelly (Kellys@alaska.net), February 01, 1999.

Although I can't add to the discussion of the technical aspects of the shot I can add my pleasure in looking at the result. I think the main attraction is the curious gaze of the young fox out from its familiar habitat. Thanks for sharing the image.

-- Garry Schaefer (schaefer@pangea.ca), February 02, 1999.

"The real question is, how close does it approach the original?" If Peter means the original slide, I think there is a more important question. How close does the "print" match reality or your visualization of reality? It's all a matter of personal preference, but I think the greens in your print need some more life. This is of course a minor point because the real star of your image is the expressive fox.

-- Larry Korhnak (lvk@gnv.ifas.ufl.edu), February 03, 1999.

I want to thank everyone for the comments. I really didn't understand at first. It looked ok to me. But I decided to try increasing the saturation and sure enough you were right. The leaves look much more natural. In summer in Denali the leaves are very green and the fox coloring looks much more correct too. I learned an important lesson on this one, thanks again.

-- Micheal F. Kelly (Kellys@Alaska.net), February 07, 1999.